It’s ten to one you read in my title the opener to a much cited quote about Nazi Germany. And two to one that even if you couldn’t identify the author, Pastor Martin Niemöller, you could give an approximation of how the rest of it goes: I did not speak out because I was not a socialist…a trade unionist…a Jew…
Though anchored in time and place, in history at its darkest, the pastor’s remorse – he was not speaking rhetorically but in penitence – points to a truth neither finite nor spatially bound but universal: what goes around comes around. To look the other way as others are cruelly treated is not only cowardly and immoral. It is dangerously myopic. No man, opined one of England’s finest poets, is an island. Ask not for whom the bell tolls.
Then they came for the intellectuals…
Mao targeted these. So, in more distilled and chilling form, did Pol Pot. And long before Hitler’s doctors injected the disabled – life unworthy of the name – with benzene prior to graduating to carbon monoxide in sealed vans, and longer still before his inner circle drew up its plans for a final solution to The Jewish Problem, thinkers were ridiculed, purged and if need be liquidated by the Third Reich. All regimes strive to channel, to set limits to acceptable thought within, their intelligentsia.
This, for reasons I’ll go into another time, is not hard. Independence of mind is rare, academia not excepted. Scholars have competence in forms of symbolic discourse learned by way of apprenticeships that confer useful reasoning tools and, at best, an obligation of truthfulness through evidence based argument. They do little, however, to nurture originality, far less a stance of fearless independence.
There are exceptions. Over decades half in/half out of academia I’ve known professors, and more junior academics, I deem astute and independent thinkers. They are a minority though. Academics are seldom stupid – though a few have left me wondering – but not always that bright either. Not in the terms I’ve set out, of truly independent mindedness and the capacity to set aside a-priori assumptions; to take risks, and think with startling originality.
(That capacity demands heart and soul as well as brain, and for the most mundane of reasons. Our institutionally fostered careerism, intensified by the marketisation of academia, begets cynicism. Which in turn begets, by way of strategies to ease cognitive dissonance, diminished rigour. First it comes for your promotional aspirations. Then for your critical faculties …)
All of which makes Professor Piers Robinson special in my book. Connected in more ways than one – he works at University of Sheffield, where I taught (without our paths crossing), and he too reviewed for OffGuardian the recently published 9/11 Unmasked – we met over coffee for the first and so far only time back in October.
It was a good meeting: cordial, focused and wide ranging within a coherent framework. We’d read one another’s work and, while his knowledge of our topics – Syria, 9/11 and corporate media – far exceeds mine, he was appreciative and supportive of those like me who seek to synthesise and popularise views and facts subversive of dominant messages too useful to vested interests, and with too many incongruities and roaring silences, for acceptance at face value by the critically minded.
In the hour and a half we spent together, before I had to dash for a train to London, his detailed grasp of those three topics at times left me struggling to keep up. We agreed on parting to make these meetings a monthly event, though my November move to Nottingham has put this on the back burner.
What I remembered most clearly was his severally repeated insistence that things are worse than we realise. He may have said this in respect of Syria. He certainly said it in respect of 9/11. Most of all though he said it in respect of corporate media, addressing a conclusion long held by me: that the false narratives on Russia and the middle east may be aggravated by the career cynicism (similar to that in academia) and lazy credulity of journalists, but has at root more to do with the limits of dissent set by market forces.
Though I don’t recall him disagreeing, he finds that view – of journalists as credulous rather than consciously propagandist – too charitable. Nor is he the only one to say so. I’ve been taken to task on this by BTL comments on OffGuardian pieces I’ve written, and by a Media Lens editor who wondered if pulled punches on George Monbiot betray a mild form of Stockholm Syndrome. At any rate, this recurring claim by Piers Robinson – that things are worse than we realise – is what I most recollect from our espresso fuelled engagement in October.
(In referring, amongst other things, to media infiltration by intelligence services, he cited his own experience. That said, unswerving backing by BBC and Guardian – Independent to lesser extent – of the West’s wars on the global south, and relentless Russia baiting, should in any case caution the open minded against slamming the door on such a possibility.)
I took it personally, therefore, when I was alerted – through a FB post by Elizabeth Woodworth, co-author of two books reviewed by me on this site and in OffGuardian, to a Huffington Post assault on Piers Robinson three days ago, on December 7. Indeed, the vitriolic tone – coupled with too many appeals to authority, too few to evidence – would have had me penning a swifter response, on this site and on the day, had I not been taken up with concerns that have kept me from writing for too long. Fortunately, Elizabeth has published her own on-the-day response, in the form of this open letter to HuffPo editor Jess Brammar and feature writer Chris York.
I do not know what happened on September 11, 2001, Robinson’s position on which is the thrust of HuffPo’s attack. I do know I was way too quick to condemn, on logical rather than empirical grounds, all 9/11 Truthers. Most inexcusably, I confused a marxist view – that conspiracy is not needed to explain the demonic logic of capital in the age of imperialism – with the non sequitur that 9/11 could not have been a false flag operation.
I ain’t saying it was, mind. Just that I can no longer – due to Elizabeth Woodworth’s and David Ray Griffin’s book on the subject – rule it out. Actually that’s too weak. I can say emphatically that whatever did happen on 9/11, the official account by the National Institute of Standards & Technology – a US government inquiry accorded impartial and unimpeachable status by the HuffPo hatchet piece – is so riddled with flaws, inconsistencies and refusals to address hard evidence (indeed, in places with active concealment of the stuff) as to invite accusations of “coincidence theorist” and “pathologically credulous” on those who see NIST as fair-minded investigation, Truthism as the preserve of a lunatic fringe.
But back to that HuffPo piece. Do read it. And Elizabeth Woodworth’s open letter. Then, if you’re in the mood for more, try the Media Lens book, reviewed here, Propaganda Blitz. Might I draw your particular attention to its definition of propaganda blitzes?
…fast moving attacks … communicated with high emotional intensity and moral outrage, apparently supported by an informed corporate media/academic/expert consensus [and] reinforced by damning condemnation of anyone daring even to question the apparent consensus.
Which is as much as I have to say on the matter. For now.
- I’m inclining to the view that media conditions – in the context of declining revenues, of permanent war on the global south, and of looming strife at home – beget a third and hybrid position; an uneasy blend of naive but self serving acceptance of authority, with cultivated distaste for any line of inquiry that might challenge its core premises.
- A further nail in the coffin of my refusal to give Truthism time of day was encountered just days ago. I consider the chapter on put-option, call-option and short selling in the days prior to 9/11 the weakest link in the powerful case assembled by Griffin and Woodworth. That chapter is in my view too slim to make the case. More detailed consideration of this aspect, however, is given in two linked pieces written in 2011 for Foreign Policy Journal by Mark Gaffney. Highly recommended for its impeccable substantiation. As, indeed, is G & W’s book
For direct-transfer bank details click here.
Is it any wonder that people are gullible enough to swallow the 9/11 myth when we are still — all these decades later — swallowing the myth of the Holocaust? Including this blogger. And no, I do not deny that Jews were treated horribly by Hitler who believed wholeheartedly in collective punishment (something the Jews in Israel also support), the concept of a master race (again, Israelis also support this), forcing the Jews to leave Germany (much like Israelis want to force the Palestinians to leave) …. could go on and on about the parallels between Israel and Nazi Germany, but surely you get the gist by now.
There is NO proof that there was an actual “final solution” plan that was systematically implemented by the Nazis. War crimes committed by some Nazis? Certainly. But a coordinated plan? Where is the proof of that? Actual, historical evidence? If they had it, we would have seen it by now. Even the official 6 million figure cannot be borne out by historical documents. So much so, that the plaques at concentration camps have been revised down by MILLIONS and yet, magically, there are still 6 million Jewish victims. Wish I could apply that kind of math to my checking account. No matter how much you take away — the balance never lowers!! And, boy, those Nazis sure did miss a lot of Jews. They weren’t very efficient with their killing machines, after all.
Human lamp shades have been proven a myth. Soap made from human fat, also a lie (but it was presented as evidence at the Nuremberg trials and even given a proper Jewish burial, which was a little uncomfortable when scientific testing revealed it to be made of pork fat — along with some confessions that were obtained via torture, including the crushing of testicles …). Add in all the fake holocaust survivor stories that we let pass with barely a mention or the fact that Anne Frank’s diary was probably partially forged by her father to make it more interesting for publishing … And yet, none of these things is ever enough to make people question whether the narrative of the Holocaust *could be* simply a ruse that was used — along with the Balfour declaration — to make it possible for Jews to take over Palestine. Fascinating, really.
We’ve been conditioned by Pavlov’s dogs to tremble and shake and yell out “anti-semite” or “mossad plant” to anyone who brings up uncomfortable facts that we have been conditioned to believe by the sheer repetitiveness of the Holocaust industry. It is the one issue that everyone, everywhere can agree on. It is okay to question every other event in history BUT that one. Wonder why that is …
I’m not saying that Hitler was a good guy. Are there any world leaders who have ever really been the good guy? He was a narcissistic dictator with delusions of grandeur, but, funny how Nazi Germany wasn’t nearly as racist against blacks as the Jim Crow south. Jesse Owens talked about how in Germany, he didn’t have to ride in the back of the bus or stay at a different hotel just because he was black. About the famous snub of a handshake he got from Hitler, he also pointed out that the President (FDR) didn’t shake his hand either, or invite him to the White House or congratulate him on his success. Now, when it came to Jews, that was another matter — as FDR was very chummy with lots of Jews (like Brandeis). The only difference between the US and Nazi Germany was that Germany was more racist with regards to Jews and the US was more racist with regards to blacks. Oh, and we used nukes. On cities of civilians. After they had negotiated for peace. Just to show the world what we were capable of. And let’s not forget, we had our own concentration camps for Japanese Americans. We didn’t kill them, but we did seize all their assets and I don’t think they have gotten nearly as much in reparations as the Holocaust survivors have. And the Nagasaki and Hiroshima survivors of a literal holocaust (sacrifice by fire) haven’t gotten any either.
Just some food for thought. If we are going to wring our hands over why people can’t figure out 9/11 — maybe we should look in the mirror and figure out why we, ourselves, have fallen for some pretty big lies and why we are too afraid to confront truths that are painful to us.
You could precis a lot by simply adding two one-word emphases to the Huffington Post’s first paragraph:
[As an aside, your inexcuably unsupported “…the marketisation of academia…” could (but won’t) steer you onto thin ice round here. Not so long ago I posted what at least one of the OG administrators chose to classify as a cheap quip (“Touting for business?”) addressed to a BTLer of indeterminate capitalization, who regularly huffs and puffs around these quarters on the quality of the choc ice coating on his corporately sustained nose for the academic-quango-financial complex’s largesse, in response to his haughty dismissal (“Get an education.”) of another BTLer’s input. (§o fuck off quipping §teve Bell and take doodling Martin Row§on with you?)]
First they came for .. the Choir boys!
The Vatican’s third most powerful official, Cardinal George Pell, has been convicted in Australia on all charges he sexually abused two choir boys there in the late ’90s.
The verdict was delivered by an unanimous jury on Tuesday 11 Dec 2018.
Thank you, all our major news media are under a suppression order so we have been told by the press only that a person of global significance has been convicted of a grave crime.
Apparently George Pell had the backing of a good number of cardinals to appoint him as the next Pope.
Anyway, next year he’s facing another trial for some frolicking in the swimming pool.
Among them, were the disgraced Cardinals Theodore McCarrick and Bernard Law (of Boston Globe and ‘Spotlight’ infamy), by any chance? They never knew a ”frolicking” they could not turn a blind eye to.
“prior to graduating to carbon monoxide in sealed vans,” historical untruth.
However such killing machines were used by the Bolsheviks in the extermination of sixty-six million Russians.
Source for this claim please?
If you dare – https://codoh.com/library/document/933/
This is a really good article.
I like to read a background and story which lead to some conclusions. Personal experience in writing is powerful.
To Philip – I’d be interested to know your original area of expertise and maybe more on what prompted you to meet Prof Robinson.
I’m interested in different perspectives, thinking and experiences.
Thanks Loverat. As background to my legal struggle with Sheffield Hallam University, the first two or three of six blog posts beginning with Roddis v Sheffield Hallam Part 1 summarise my academic career. Part 7 has been written but my solicitor wants me to refrain from going public with it while the case is ongoing.) For other reasons, I don’t go into my work at Sheffield University, which is where Piers works.
The question of what prompted me to make contact with Piers – it’s more a case of why I took so long – is simple. I’ve come belatedly to accept that not all 9/11 truthers are self righteous zealots more interested in purity of view than in pragmatic questions of how to win others over. And that not all truthers are epistemological infants who think they can ‘prove’ their case with a thirty second video clip (pretty insulting, when you think on it, to the likes of David Ray Griffin and Elizabeth Woodworth who by that reckoning have wasted enormous time and energy on their thorough challenges to NIST). But long before that, I’ve been sceptical – English understatement, you understand – of the narratives on Russia and Syria (check my record on this site and my own). As you’ll be aware, Piers is one of “the three professors” – the others being Hayward and Anderson – routinely ridiculed by ‘our’ media for their Syria work. But the other two are further afield: Edinburgh and Sydney – while Piers works in what until a few weeks ago was my home town. In short, it was Syria wot brung us together. Hope that helps, and thanks for asking.
epistemological infants who think they can ‘prove’ their case with a thirty second video clip
— because things like this happen every day. Physics? Never heard of him. Is he Russian, or something?
pretty insulting to the likes of David Ray Griffin and Elizabeth Woodworth who by that reckoning have wasted enormous time and energy on their thorough challenges to NIST
The lady doth protest too much, methinks.
As a matter of historical fact, it was in fact the Communists that the Nazis first went after. The very night of the Reichstag fire, hundreds if not thousands of Communists were arrested. Lists of people to be arrested were in readiness before the fire.
Do a search on “Als die Nazis die Kommunisten holten”.
Lysias, that’s right — and it makes sense: from 1917 to mid 1939 European Fascism was supported by the Anglo Zio Capitalists to the hilt, “Our bulwark against Communism”. It was only in late 1939 when, “turned” by Stalin’s diplomatic master stroke, Hitler used our weapons against us — bit the hand which fed him — that “Herr” Hitler ceased to be regarded as a gentleman in the Anglo MSM.
Everytime someone feels a necessity to start with an anti HITLER sentence..i immidiately become SUSPICIOUS .. It is a SIGN of APEASEMENT ..an Attempt to ward of Attacks by those who RULE .a pitiful piece of ASS-LICKING .especially in ZIO ANGLOSAXONIA –aka the UK and the USA where they are undisputed MASTERS … in the first Case since 1694 ..in the second case since 1913 … to put a DATE on Issues….
I advise everyone to Read and Re-read a Quote from Michail Bakunin ..a TRUE and FIGHTING SOCIALIST ..in order to understand where EVIL emmanates ..in all its chamaelon like disguises :
“Marx is a Jew and is surrounded by a crowd of little, more or less intelligent, scheming, agile, speculating Jews, just as Jews are everywhere, commercial and banking agents, writers, politicians, correspondents for newspapers of all shades; in short, literary brokers, just as they are financial brokers, with one foot in the bank and the other in the socialist movement, and their arses sitting upon the German press. They have grabbed hold of all newspapers, and you can imagine what a nauseating literature is the outcome of it.
Now this entire Jewish world, which constitutes an exploiting sect, a people of leeches, a voracious parasite, Marx feels an instinctive inclination and a great respect for the Rothschilds. This may seem strange. What could there be in common between communism and high finance? Ho ho! The communism of Marx seeks a strong state centralization, and where this exists there must inevitably exist a state central bank, and where this exists, there the parasitic Jewish nation, which speculates upon the labor of the people, will always find the means for its existence.
In reality, this would be for the proletariat a barrack regime, under which the workingmen and the working closely and intimately connected with one another, regardless not only of frontiers but of political differences as well – this Jewish world is today largely at the disposal of Marx or Rothschild. I am sure that, on the one hand, the Rothschilds appreciate the merits of Marx, and that on the other hand, women, converted into a uniform mass, would rise, fall asleep, work and live at the beat of the drum; the privilege of ruling would be in the hands of the skilled and the learned, with a wide scope left for profitable crooked deals carried on by the Jews, who would be attracted by the enormous extension of the international speculations of the national banks.” — Mikhail Bakunin, Etude sur les juifs allemands, 1869
And by the way … Martin Niemøller never said that Quoted Sentence … it is a piece of Post WW 2 PROPAGANDA
FUCK ! …. HOW MANY GOOD PEOPLE ARE STUPID ! … off Guardian .. are One of them ! …. SAD !
Come now, fess up. You’re a false flagger in the pay of the Mossad, right? Thought so.
Meanwhile, a mate of mine says there’s a button you can press on your computer to stop the words coming out in upper case and making you look a twat on crystal meth.
Ole! Ole! I say, I say: “And by the way …”
Where did you get that “by the way” from? Certainly not from here:
My only problem with your post is that you use the word Jew instead of ZIONIST.
The majority of Jews despise the Zionists just as much as we do. They are not the same.. Just as Protestants and Catholics are not the same…
Trotsky was in New York when he was asked to return to Petrograd in May 1917 to organize the Bolshevik phase of the Russian Revolution, he carried $10,000 for ”travel expenses”, a generously ample fund considering the value of the dollar at that time?? It has been claimed that his expenses were paid by Jacob Schiff. There is no documentation to substantiate that claim, but the circumstantial evidence does point to a wealthy donor in New York.
Trotsky was arrested by Canadian and British naval personnel, when the ship, on which he was traveling, the S.S. Kristianiafjord, put in at Halifax. The money in his possession is now a matter of ‘official record’. The source of that money: evidence strongly suggests, that its origin was the German government/Rothschild Cartel Bank.. It was a sound investment.
Lenin was in exile most of his time in Switzerland and London, then the Rothschilds of Germany funded him to return to Russia to be disruptive and stir up trouble in order to spark a revolution that would eventually take Russia out of World War 1 and permit Germany to concentrate its military forces on other fronts instead of having to split them between two fronts. The strategy succeeded quickly since Lenin arrived in Russia in April 1917 and by October 25, 1917 (old style Russian calendar; November 7, new style) engineered the coupe that toppled the Provisional Government . In March 1918, , Russia signed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk ending Russia’s participation in World War 1.
One thing that the Rothschild dynasty has done quite well, is hide its control over and
involvement in the United States. First came the nation’s financial affairs:
“J.P. Morgan was appointed head representative of the Rothschild interests in the UnitedStates. As the result of the London Conference, J.P. Morgan and Company of New York, Drexel and Company of Philadelphia, Grenfell and Company of London, and Morgan Harjes Cie of Paris, M.M. Warburg Company of Germany and America, and the House of Rothschild were all affiliated.”
Open this link to see where the octopus goes:
Chronology of the Zionist Master Plan
for World Domination
Virtually all of the items included in this chronology are direct quotations from Zionists or from their books. At the end of this article there will be listed the various books, their authors, the publishing firms and the dates of publication.
1896 Theodor Herzl published “The Jewish State.” It became the Zionists’ bible. The following exact quotes are from Herzl’s book:
. “When we sink, we become a revolutionary proletariat, the subordinate officers of all revolutionary parties; at the same time, when we rise, there rises also our terrible power of the purse.” .
”…. the longer Anti-Semitism lies in abeyance the more fiercely will it break out.”
”…Universal brotherhood is not even a beautiful dream. Antagonism is essential to man’s greatest efforts.” .
1897. Lord Edmond Rothschild of London and Jacob H. Schiff of New York City, two of the Elders of Zion, got Theodor Herzl (of Austria) to arrange for the World Zionist Congress at Basel, Switzerland; 197 delegates met there and laid out a plan of World Conquest with plans for a World Government. Herzl, founder of Zionism, in opening the meeting, raised his right hand and repeated an ancient oath of the Talmudists:
“If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, may my right hand forget its cunning.” Herzl also said at this meeting: “We are one nation. We are neither American nor Russian Jews, but only Jews!” He also said: ‘With a few exceptions that do not figure at all, the entire press of the world is in our hands.”
Dr. Mandelstam professor of the University of Kiev, Russia said on August 29 at the opening of the Zionist Congress of 1897: “The Jews will use all their influence and power to prevent the rise and prosperity of other nations and are resolved to adhere to their historic hopes; i.e., The conquest of world power.”
LE TEMPS, Paris, September 3,1897.
The Zionist Organization of America was organized in 1897 with Richard Gottheil of Columbia University as its first president, and Rabbi Stephen Wise as the first secretary. Branches for women (Hadassah), and children (Young Judea) were soon organized.
1898 Dr. Mandelstam, , at Basel Zionist Congress in 1898 said: “The Jews energetically reject the idea of fusion with the other nationalities and cling firmly to their historical hope, i.e., of world empire.”
the Foundation of the Nineteenth Century, by H. S Chamberlain, Vol. I, p. 335. Also Democracy and World Dominion .p 22
1900. Theodor Herzl, the Zionist leader, went to see Abdul Hamid the Sultan of Turkey, to buy land for the Zionists in PALESTINE. When the Sultan said “no” he had a revolution on his hands. Note later item in 1914.
Between 1900 and the outbreak of World War I (1914), the United States was flooded by large waves of immigration from Eastern Europe.
1901. Because President William McKinley in the United States refused to be a stooge for the International Bankers, he was killed by Russian Zionist Zolkozh. Presidents Lincoln [on Good Friday] and Garfield had been previously murdered.
Doctor Leopold Kahn summed up these sentiments when speaking about Zionism in a Jewish school at Pozrony (Bratislava) in 1901: “Jews will never be assimilated and will never adopt the customs or morals of strangers. The Jew will remain a Jew under all circumstances ..” WORLD CONQUERORS.
1902. Lenin joins Trotsky in Switzerland on Editorial Board of Zionist publication ISKRA (THE SPARK). It was printed in Munich, Germany.
Kuhn, Loeb & Co. was one of the founders and chief financiers of the scandalous Panama Canal Co.
1903. Dr. Simon Flexner, one of three busy brothers became director of laboratories of the Rockefeller Institute. AMERICAN MERCURY, November 1958,
At the Sixth Zionist Congress in 1903 at Basel Switzerland Dr. Max Nordau, an Elder of Zion said we quote from the AMERICAN JEWISH NEWS, New York, Vol. 4, No 2, September 19, 1919, “Theodor Herzl has considered it his duty to maintain valuable relations with this great and progressive power (England). Herzl knows that we stand (in 1903) before a tremendous upheaval of the whole world. Soon, perhaps some kind of world congress will have to be called, and England, the great, free and powerful England, will then continue the work it has begun with its generous offer to the Sixth (Zionist) Congress in 1903. And if you ask me now what has Israel to do in Uganda, then . . . let me tell you the following words as if I were showing you the rungs of a ladder leading upward and upward: Herzl, the Zionist Congress (1897), the English Uganda proposition (1903), the future World War (1914-1918), the peace conference (1919-1920) where with the help of England a free and Jewish Palestine will be created.”
“Like a mighty thunder these last words came to us, and we all were trembling and awe-struck as if we had seen a vision of old.”
Lord Edmond Rothschild of London and Jacob H. Schiff of New York City, two of the Elders of Zion, got Theodor Herzl (of Austria) to arrange for the World Zionist Congress at Basel, Switzerland; 197 delegates met there and laid out a plan of WORLD CONQUEST WITH PLANS FOR A WORLD GOVERNMENT Herzl, founder of Zionism, in opening the meeting, raised his right hand and repeated an ancient oath of the Talmudists:
“If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, may my right hand forget its cunning.” Herzl also said at this meeting: “We are one nation. We are neither American nor Russian Jews, but only Jews!” He also said: ‘With a few exceptions that do not figure at all, the entire PRESS of the world is in our hands.”
Dr.. Mandelstam professor of the University of Kiev, Russia, said on August 29 1897 at the opening of the Zionist Congress : “The Jews will use all their influence and power to prevent the rise and prosperity of other nations.. and are resolved to adhere to their historic hopes; ie:The conquest of world power.” LE TEMPS, Paris, September 3,1897.
Please open this link and read to understand what is happening happened.
Who was Theodore Hertzl?
Here’s an eye opening article from 29th Jan 2008. I would have posted snips but it is best read as a whole.
That Lenin and Trotsky accepted money from the Rothschilds in Germany does not necessarily mean that they felt indebted to their financial sponsors. To Lenin, the notion of the capitalist enemy offering revolutionaries money in the expectation that the recipients would feel grateful and do their donors’ bidding (when in fact the recipients had no such intention in mind) would have been an example of the capitalists hanging themselves with their own rope.
Unfortunately Lenin did not survive long enough as a political leader for us to know if he really did feel in hock to German financiers or planned to turn the tables on them. Trotsky was run out of the Soviet Union by Stalin for being one of the original set of revolutionaries and any assistance he (Trotsky) later rendered to the West against the Soviets should be seen in that context. So the notion that the Bolsheviks were part of a Zionist conspiracy remains an unfortunate consequence.
The majority of Jews despise the Zionists just as much as we do.
We always hear about these masses of anti-zionist Jews. Occasionally, you encounter a few people who fit that description — three or four people holding a “Not in Our Name” banner at a Palestine demonstration, or something. You might get the impression that they are quite marginalized and alienated from the Jewish community.
How many anti-zionist Jews defended Norman Finkelstein when the zionists came for him?
Well certainly Jewish criminals like the convicted pedophile Jeff Epstein , who ferried Bill Clinton’s penis to Pedophile Island in the US Virgin Islands 26 times, seem to be able to muster considerable support. And what did Clinton need to do on that tiny island?The FBI will surely have videos of Prince Andrew and Clinton there. Imagine the forces at play which resulted in Epstein getting a cushy brief nocturnal custodial sentence for pimping out the poor vulnerable near homeless adolescents to the powerful. Very reminiscent of Janner, Rochdale, Rotherham and Oxford.
There will be more to come on this one.
The intellectuals Mao went for we’re mainly traitors and people who would gladly give up China to the west which is almost what they did
The anglo-american media are simply mouthpieces of the permanent government and of the special interests of their owners, who can afford to bear the wholly unprofitable, loss-making cost of the press. It has been this way since 1900. These are the two forces that set the limits of dissent.
Thus Mr. Roddick I am mystified when you say the limits of dissent are set by market forces. Which market forces?
Journalists who know what’s good for them please editors. Editors who know what’s good for them please proprietors. Proprietors, by definition fully paid up members of the ruling class, crave knighthoods but more importantly need advertisers. Whilst I do not rule out the line of enquiry you open up – that within some financial empires, titles might be run at a loss (sprats to catch mackerel) – I’ve seen no evidence of this as a widespread business model. Have you?
Moreover, my sights are less on the likes of a Murdoch or Barclay Brother – widely known by, folk likely to read me, as biased; more on such as Graun, HuffPo and (only slightly removed from market pressures) BBC.
Elenits could have been speaking of the Australian print newspaper industry generally among others. Titles owned by News Corporation, such as the regular loss-making The Australian (which should long have been relegated to the dustbins of history, forgotten and unmourned), are subsidised by News Corp’s more profitable businesses like 20th Century Fox.
Eric Beecher, “The death of Fairfax and the end of newspapers”
Note that Beecher’s article is dated July 2013, and much of what he says there is coming to pass.
The Fairfax Media which publishes The Sydney Morning Herald and The Melbourne Age has now completely merged with Nine Entertainment Company.
Oscar Grenfell, “Australia: Nine-Fairfax Media merger threatens jobs”
It’s likely that these former Fairfax newspapers will continue to limp along as they are currently doing – I can’t vouch for The Age but the SMH is pretty much wall-2-wall New York Times / Washington Post reprints in its foreign news coverage (it doesn’t reprint from The Guardian because Guardian Australia is a competitor – something to be thankful for) – and slowly become more crippled on their Nine Entertainment Company Zimmer frames as time goes by.
Thanks Jen. The from-the-trenches perspective of the Beecher piece makes it especially useful. As I said to elinits, I don’t rule out that line of enquiry. Indeed, I refer in my footnote 1 to “declining [newspaper] revenues”, which I see as game-changing. Worth reading is James Curran, for many decades a shrewd commentator on the media. Forty years ago, as an undergraduate in the then highly novel – and yet to degenerate – discipline of Communication Studies, I found myself quoting him in an essay on the Radical Press which, for a brief period after the Napoleonic Wars – time of Peterloo, and pre Marx – had flourished in England despite savage penalties. I still recall, almost verbatim, his words:
“Market forces succeeded, where direct repression had failed, in constraining the media, with lasting consequences for society.”
But this is 2018, not 1977. Which is why I don’t rule out the possibilities suggested by elenits and feared by Beecher, and why I do call the new realities game-changing’. The problem I have with elinits’ comment are threefold: (a) its unsubstantiated – and I think unsubstantiable – claim that these realities have held “since 1900”; (b) the strident non sequitur of its “thus Mr Roddick [sic] …” and (c) a failure to acknowledge that a flagging business model opens up tensions whose resolution is far less certain and far less simple than he seems to think.
Nevertheless, I thank elenits for injecting, however ineptly, an element of great significance. There is far more empirical and theoretical work to be done in this arena.
Professor Robinson is right: things are much, much worse than we/most of us realise. It always astonishes – and disturbs – me to come across clearly intelligent people who either flatly deny the ‘inside job’ option or at least say they are not sure. The weight of the collective evidence is so immense that there should be no room for doubt.
I admire the fact that AE911Truth have kept the issue alive for so many years – while the once strong and vociferous truth movements appear to have given up the fight. Nonetheless, I always felt that AE911Truth picked the wrong target. There are several more vulnerable aspects of the official story – such as the obvious planting of supposed evidence (clearly fake, since the landing wheels alleged to have miraculously survived the (alleged) crashing of the (allegedly hijacked) planes didn’t even match the type of plane the official account asserted.
The result was that AE911Truth got bogged down in a largely unproductive attempt to get NIST to admit they were covering up the truth – something that NIST would clearly never do. The powerful myth of the hijacked planes, Muslim hijackers and Osama bin Laden’s responsibility for the attack was allowed to remain – reinforced by the faked capture, assassination and burial at sea of Osama (he is reliably reported to have died of kidney failure in December of 2001) – lending spurious legitimacy to the meme of Islamic jihadist terrorism … allowing further inside jobs across the world (especially across Europe and even more especially in Britain) to be carried out in furtherance of the bogus “war on terror”.
How many of those born just before or just after 2001, i.e. today’s late teens, know or care about 9/11? I suspect that they – together with the majority of the adult population – have largely accepted the official stories of 7/7, the Bali nightclub bombing, the Madrid train bombing and all the more recent ‘terrorist’ incidents in the capitals and large cities of Europe, which have entered the popular consciousness as unquestionable fact.
Perhaps this is what Professor Robinson was referring to … meanwhile, behind the smokescreen of a possibly engineered fake Brexit, and despite the fact that the EU is more disunited than ever before, millions across Europe still do not understand what the EU project was really about: the creation (“without the people understanding what is happening”, as Monnet is reported to have said) of the “EU Superstate”, with a combined military force under ‘single-point’ command (i.e. outwith the control of parliaments) and with a remit to control what the planners see as Europe’s “backyard”: most of North Africa and much of eastern Europe (including and extending beyond Ukraine).
The demonisation of Russia and Putin is no coincidence. It’s the continuation of the Atlanticist dream of occupying and controlling the vast resources of Russia in the attempt to preserve the global dominance of the USA and its allies (in the interests of the finance, banking, military and corporate elites).
How many ‘Remainers’ – and even ‘Leavers’ – have any awareness of this? What we are seeing is a classic “divide et impera” strategy which is leading to an ultimately fascist control of Europe, with an increasingly interwoven police and military apparatus to stamp out resistance. Will the gilets jaunes be bribed back into silent servitude? This might just be the last real opportunity to resist. While the Brexit farce continues to distract people, the largely unreported situation in Ukraine becomes more threatening by the day.
“It always astonishes – and disturbs – me to come across clearly intelligent people who either flatly deny the ‘inside job’ option or at least say they are not sure. The weight of the collective evidence is so immense that there should be no room for doubt.”
Because they have never examined in detail any of the evidence, and actively refuse to do so. Same story every time.
So few in today’s society have any real capacity for critical thinking, to the point where they actively refuse to listen to/read something that goes against their assumptions, biases and programming.
Humankind in the main makes its decisions based on (mostly created by peer pressure) emotional bias, not logic and facts. That was the psychological revelation of the mid 20th century and Edward Bernays work. People buy crap they don’t need that’s no good for them because the TV ads tell them to do so and they don’t want to be ‘left out’, in much the same way they are told (at school, home, tv, radio etc) where the boundaries of what they can and can’t think with regards to the world and politics.
Nowadays I tend to mock people, which I know I shouldn’t. But come on, concrete and steel and near free-fall speeds of collapse. Low level high school physics. But it’s outside that boundary so the thinking process glitches …………”does not compute” ………”must think about something else”………..
I have to admit it scares me how effectively people can and are being programmed to not use their brains in our current societies.
Agreed. I recommend people to watch today’s issue of the UK Column News (the live stream has just ended, but the programme will be available on demand in a couple of hours or so). What is happening in Europe in terms of the amalgamation of military and police/gendarmes is chilling. The ‘terrorist’ incident in Strasbourg is almost certainly yet another false flag. No coincidence that members of the security forces were apparently targeted (though appearances can be deceptive!). It’s always useful to the authorities to have such people appear to be the victims of attacks. There are several obvious examples in recent events in the UK. The effective shutdown of protest in Strasbourg will be a model followed in other countries – if people even have the wit and courage to resist.
There is an absolutely absurdly Russophobic opinion piece in today’s Graun by a German politician. Basically foaming at the mouth to attack Russia because Ukraine, Nordstream 2 etc. etc. Beneath it says comments will be premoderated. I wrote a comment saying the article was absolutely nonsense but there was no point in writing a lengthy rebuttal as anything that does not fit MSM groupthink will be deleted. Sure enough, my comment was deleted. Naturally, all the Putin haters and GCHQ trolls are out in force writing how horrible Russia is. Sad and pathetic. Worse than comments will not be opened, or were opened in mistake.
John, it would be much better for your health not to read the Fraudian. There is now nothing in it that is not filtered, censored, Bowdlerized, manipulated, and manufactured. It is a macrocosm of its own comment section.
Whilst we accept the ‘winners’ version of history there is no ‘truth’ or freedom.
The british people did not accept the MSM monstering of the bicycling, allotment growing, jam making, tea totaller, oldish, unpolished, beardy.
We do not let anyone come for our friends or neighbours with impunity – dressed as the state or not. The French take to their streets; we defend ours.
The 40 year unfettered neolib/con project is on it’s last legs. The feasting rats and their nests are going to be cleared.
Starting with the unelected DS and their willng minions of the media and academia. They can have a fair trial before sanction. Their gains and plunder will not be immune. They can have truth and reconciliation. As Caitlin Johnstone wrote yesterday there are only 3 choices for humanity. The time to chose is imminent.
Don’t rely on the www not to be switched off! Printing presses, posters and graffiti are not yet inconsequential. They will fight like cornered rats do.
It is time to reaffirm the postwar social democratic covenant that has been stealthily reversed by appeal to the base instincts.
I know I shouldn’t be shocked – but I am – at the personalised nature of the attack on Prof Robinson, with little rebuttal of the substance of his positions. It certainly lays bare, as if we needed further evidence, of the totally unprincipled depths to which ‘journalists’ in the mainstream media are prepared to sink. Thank you Mr Roddis for bringing this to our attention.
You’re most welcome, Mr Bryan.
I regard it as highly significant that “The Jews” who were formerly the object of “AntiSemitic” slaughter are now dealing out racist slaughter against their “Semitic” neighbours. Dante describes this universally recurring phenomenon in the Inferno of Perverted Intelligence; Canto 25, just after the Hell of the Hypocrites and shortly before the Last Circle, the Hell of the Treacherous where Satan himself sits — ie, in deep TonyLand. There are Man-eating Lizards on the ground chasing humans and eating them; and the Humans change into man-eating Lizards which change into Humans which change into man-eating Lizards in an endless cycle of terror and revenge.
9/11 was not a catastrophic one-off – western MSM always was and always will be complicit with geopolitical violence conducted by the US and it’s vassal states.
Find me a single story where these platforms do not toe the corporate line, most recently with slavering hatred of Russia, and before that a ludicrous campaign to rehabilitate the reputation of ISIS as ‘anti-Assad’ forces or ‘the white helmets’.
Along the way they have persecuted Julian Assange, supported fascists in the Ukraine and pushed official myths about Salisbury.
Nowadays it is a given to assume that if you really want to know what’s going on in the world make sure you visit a salt mine before reading too much into anything the corporate media says.
Twitter enforcing Israeli military censorship
The Electronic Intifada was forced by Twitter to delete a tweet linking to a story that has been subject to Israeli military censorship.
While Facebook has become notorious for enforcing censorship on behalf of Israel, this is a new turn by Twitter.
It is another ominous sign of how monopolistic Silicon Valley corporations – especially Facebook and Google – _that control what are in effect the public commons_ are colluding with governments to control information freedom provided by the internet.
(Article and picture censored by Twitter at the electronic intifada link): https://electronicintifada.net/
Caitlin nails it again>
Brilliant as ever. I’ve asked her to marry me. She’s mulling over it.
9/11 SYNTHETIC TERRORISM: MADE IN USA
Prof Robinson comes across as very measured and mild in the language he uses. I don’t think he’d push a theory without a great deal of evidence and even then I think he’d tend to say there many unanswered questions over 9/11 rather than promoting a precise scenario.
The message I get from his presentations around the country and TV appearances is take a look at 9/11 and other events.- and the evidence which should make anyone question official narratives. Sound advice when you look back at events like WMDs.
That’s what makes attacks on him not credible. I think Prof Robinson is now recognised as someone who has successfully chipped away at the official narrative through his expertise on propaganda in a ‘liberal’ society and how this is used to achieve regime change and promote war. The powers don’t like it because in combination with other experts, researchers and some journalists, the narrative is being questioned more and more.
Hence York, Eliot Higgins and co are directed to write smear pieces against academics and others. I would ask, who would you believe? An academic who devotes his time to research these matters – or some unqualified couch potato, ex-underwear salesperson like Eliot Higgins writing a smear piece? Higgins is the worst – York not far behind him in terms of lack of ability and credibility.
There was actually a co-ordinated smear attack on academics by the Times and other media after the Douma incident a few months back – I would imagine directed at the highest level. I’m sure there’s much more to come.
Hence York, Eliot Higgins and co are directed to write smear pieces against academics and others. I would ask, who would you believe? An academic who devotes his time to research these matters – or some unqualified couch potato, ex-underwear salesperson like Eliot Higgins writing a smear piece? Higgins is the worst – York not far behind him in terms of lack of ability and credibility.
Speaking of the ex-women’s underwear company employee, there is also a Twitter parody account of the famed Mr. Bellingscat himself at:
Bellingdawg’s commentary about the current French Civil War and the Macron Regime’s brutal repression of the moderate Yellow Vests rebels, as well as the noble humanitarian efforts of the Black Helmets organization, is heart-rending.
Also heartbreaking is the Twitter account of little 7-year Benoite Abedoux who is calling for NATO humanitarian air strikes in France against the regime of Animal Macron:
There are a few versions of Niemöller’s regrets but most start with the communists.
Since it was a written poem, I guess variations on this term arise in its translations. Marx is clear on the difference: with communism premised on planned wealth production under socialism, but too far into the future to offer any but the most generalised sketches on what it would be like. Alas, subsequent history, not least of ‘parliamentary socialism’ and ‘stalinism’, has popularised crude differentiations of socialism as ‘moderate’; communism as ‘extreme’.
Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth are at a critical juncture in their efforts to open an investigation into the events of 9/11 (see the links below). My guess is that people will be literally assassinated before the grand jury to be impaneled is ever allowed to present findings – but then again people are killed everyday due to this completely corrupt system further empowered by the 9/11 false-flag – so my total respect and my financial support goes to A & E for 9/11 Truth and the Lawyers Committee for 9/11 Truth. Over 3,000 architects & engineers with everything to lose and nothing personally to gain have had the courage to continue this fight. Its up to us to support them and stand with them in any way we can.
IGTrauma, thanks for those links to Architects and Engineers. I was about to circulate their previous ones — The Scientific Evidence — under the heading, All You Need to Know About 911 Except Whodunnit:
Now from your Links it seems the next step is about to be taken; Grand Jury to find out Whodunnit. We the People must support the Grand Jury. Otherwise we shall deserve the fate of the submissive Lower Castes of India: endless generations of Debt Slavery.